Re: [Gtk2hs-users] Re: GConf bindings - second take

[Duncan C. <dun...@wo...>]

On Fri, 2004-04-23 at 15:40, Axel Simon wrote:
> I think it's better to have all the gnome stuff in one package. That way you don't 
> have to specify tons of packages when you compile an application. Quite frankly, I 
> don't see an advantage of having separate packages. Writing an application that 
> works different when some of the Gnome packages are missing seems to be very 
> difficult, especially in Haskell.

Actually, the other thing is my own ignorance & lazyness. I understand
the current makefile system for doing an individual package, I would
need some help to set up makefile(s) for a package that covers several
modules.

From the point of view of writing the bindings it might be easier to
keep the current system (+ add a gnome meta-package) since they can be
created, built & tested more or less independently. I don't think it
would be good to have the various gnome modules like the gtk module
where you build everything in one go, that would make rebuilding an
individual module during development rather slow. It makes sense for
gtk/gdk/glib/pango because they are fairly integrated/monolithic, but
the various extra gnome modules on the other hand are rather more
independent. It's nice to be able to just rebuild an individual module.

I definitely agree that the configure & makefile's could be simplified
by the assumption that the gnome modules are either all present or all
absent. We would only need --enable-gnome. 

Duncan